Christopher Kempf, the new statistical analyst of the PDC, looks at the stats behind some of the biggest upsets of 2017.

The three highest-ranked players in the world - Gary Anderson, Peter Wright and Michael van Gerwen - were collectively responsible for 25 appearances in televised finals in 2017.

At least one of those three elite darters reached the final in every event in which all three participated - an unprecedented display of dominance.

But this year's tournament action proved their vulnerability as well; the current world numbers one, two and three were unceremoniously dumped out of televised events in their first matches by players then ranked 32, 104 and in Anderson's case, by an unranked player who qualified for the tournament at a Rileys Sports Bar.

The paths to career-defining triumphs for John Henderson (Van Gerwen's conqueror in the World Grand Prix, Steve Hine (who overcame Wright in the Players Championship Finals) and Paul Hogan (who knocked out Anderson in the UK Open) were myriad, but all three rose to the occasion with clinical and tenacious play.

The opening throw for the bull can sometimes be as crucial to the outcome of a match as any dart within the match itself.

Such was the case in Van Gerwen's shock first round defeat in Dublin, a match in which the world number one missed 27 darts at starting doubles and recorded his lowest World Grand Prix average since 2012.

This anaemic form allowed Henderson, who threw first in the match and in the final set, to win deciding legs in which Van Gerwen did not attempt a single dart at a finishing double.

Henderson missed a mere five darts at tops to start in the seven legs in which he threw first, making himself unbreakable in the deciding set.

Although Van Gerwen actually won a majority of legs in the match - seven to the Scot's six - Henderson hit the bullseye to imperil the Dutchman's title defence and won legs when it mattered to eliminate him.

The world's best darts players can often count on a brief lapse of form from their unseeded rivals, during which they can break, surge ahead and seize control of the match.

If Peter Wright expected such an opportunity in the first round of the Players Championship Finals against the muffin-wielding underdog Hine, it never came.

In his 6-5 upset of number three seed Wright, Hine masterfully applied pressure to his opponent by attempting darts at doubles in each of the last ten legs of the match.

Despite never scoring a 180, and only finishing where he was guaranteed at least two darts with which to win the leg, Hine clawed his way back from a 3-1 deficit by recording 21 two-treble visits and shutting out his opponent's break attempts with three consecutive 13-dart holds of throw.

Never give your opponent breathing room, make him fight for every leg; this is the lesson to be learned from the Muffin Man's masterful Minehead triumph.

Three extraordinary strokes of bad luck were as responsible as Paul Hogan's resilient performance for the surprise third-round elimination of Gary Anderson at the UK Open.

In the fourth leg, Anderson's dart at bullseye for an 84 checkout bounced out, despite making a visible scratch in the red sisal.

In the next leg, the Scot's attempt to put pressure on Hogan's throw was thwarted by a third dart that 'Robin Hooded' his second, likely costing him 54 points and two darts at doubles with which to break Hogan's throw.

Finally, in one of the most dramatic conclusions to a match of 2017, Anderson again threw a dart at the bull for an 84 finish, this time in the deciding 19th leg of the match.

Again it made a mark on the surface of the bullseye - in almost exactly the same place as it did earlier in the match - but Anderson's arrow dropped to the floor.

Hogan won each leg in which one of these most unexpected opportunities presented itself, but he could not have done so without reaching a finish in 11 darts or less in 16 of his 18 legs so as to capitalize on them.

Mistakes, bounceouts and slow starts often endanger a top player's tournament run in a best-of-11-legs match, but may prove no hindrance at all in a long format.

Defeating one of history's greatest darts players can be helped along by a bit of luck, but Hogan, Hine and Henderson certainly proved that it cannot be done without an exceptional performance of one's own.

ssjsa wrote:Have to say I was somewhat surprised with the low percentage of going the 19s route on 116.

Not really alot of pros love D18 as its basically in line with T20 plus you throw at the 18's all day not suprised those who go 19's love tops. Plus on 20's you can stick on it after two singles (76 left) whilst on 19's have to change (78 left).

Have posted this, but really only for those who have a real interest in drilling down into the stats.

A look at the strategy and probability of switching, with some extensive data analysis from the past week of darts. Switching is often a trade-off between a higher per-dart average score and a higher treble percentage.

ssjsa wrote:Have posted this, but really only for those who have a real interest in drilling down into the stats.

A look at the strategy and probability of switching, with some extensive data analysis from the past week of darts. Switching is often a trade-off between a higher per-dart average score and a higher treble percentage.

Jesus Christ.
Get that bloke a bird for heavens sake.
What sort of anorak analyses that?

In an effort to try to breathe life into this disaster of a thread i thought i'd post a stat.

The third most hit double in the recent PDC worlds was...............the bull
I have asked ssja to publish bull stats since it's massive increase in size (you could eat your dinner off it) but to no avail but Christopher has obliged:-

"it's the same trolls spouting the same crap every other post.... you have to be some kind of sad act to watch nearly 8 hours of darts a day for 9 days just to post about how crap it is"

Christopher Kempf, the new statistical analyst of the PDC, takes a statistical look at the differences between double 16 and double 20.

A CHANGING of the guard took place at the William Hill World Darts Championship, not only with respect to the retirement of the veteran champion Phil Taylor or to Rob Cross' long-awaited defeat of world number one Michael van Gerwen, but also to the shifting strategies of players choosing a finishing double.

The 2017/2018 World Championship was the first in at least a decade in which each of the four semi-finalists preferred, won more legs on, and threw more darts at, double 16 than they did with respect to double 20.

It was also notable for the early eliminations of many of the traditional adherents of tops over double 16: none of James Wade, Adrian Lewis, Dave Chisnall, Peter Wright, Alan Norris or Jelle Klaasen - all of whom threw far more darts at tops in 2017 than they did at the other go-to double - advanced beyond the second round.

Van Gerwen, Jamie Lewis, Rob Cross and Phil Taylor by themselves hit 43% of the tournament's double 16s, with an accuracy approaching 50%, and only 16% of the tournament's double tops.

Throughout the World Championship, double 16 proved to be, on balance, the easier and more advantageous double of the two at which to throw for the leg.

The green bed had the higher doubles percentage (45.9%) than the red (41.1%).

Each of the doubles reached by missing double 16 to the inside (double eight and double four), moreover, had higher checkout percentages than those in the double 20 sequence (double ten and double five) - compare the wide gap between double four (44.4%) and double five (36.7%).

Players also missed double top to the inside 28.1% of the time, forcing themselves to switch to smaller doubles more frequently than double 16 throwers, who split their scores only 21.1% of the time.

These findings confirm data gathered in 2017 for the PDC as a whole, which indicate that the 32 checkout is a safer bet than 40, that doubles ten and five are more risky than doubles eight and four, and that the fear of missing to the inside, especially on the double 20 route, can substantially affect the likelihood of winning the leg.

The difference in outcomes between tops and double 16 becomes most striking when comparing checkout attempts between 41 and 52, in which a player can freely choose to leave one double or the other.

Of the 159 instances at Ally Pally in which a single number was successfully hit to set up two darts at a double at either D20 or D16, players in 80% of cases chose to set up the lesser of the two and checked out in 73% of attempts, while those who opted for "top of the shop" won the leg in that visit only 60% of the time.

If those probabilities remained constant in the long run across the PDC, favourers of double 16 could expect to win at least one more leg than their rivals in every match in which such the 41-52 checkout scenario presented itself half a dozen times.

It is not immediately clear why double 16 should have a higher checkout percentage than the equally-sized double 20.

To be sure, the astronomical 46% accuracy attained on double 16 at the World Championship was affected by the top players' propensity to throw for that double, which inflated the tournament percentage.

Phil Taylor, in particular, demonstrated for the final time his uncanny accuracy on double 16, which he missed to the inside only four times en route to 34 checkouts on his most frequently attempted double.

However, double 16 still has about a 2.5% advantage over tops in checkout percentage for the PDC as a whole. Why is this?

For one thing, double 20 is located at the highest point on the dartboard, above any of the trebles which a player might attempt en route to that double.

In contrast, double 16 is located roughly at the same height as the treble 19, which most players will attempt at least once during a leg.

The less extreme switch to double 16 from any other target may improve the overall odds of a checkout.

Furthermore, the layout of segments on the board may create a small inherent advantage for double 16's fans.

For players who miss double 16 to the inside, almost no adjustment is necessary. Double eight is immediately adjacent to double 16 and presents the player with a target that is very similarly shaped, along with double four, to the one at which he had just aimed.

In contrast, missing double 20 inside requires a dramatic switch to nearly the other end of the board for a vertically-oriented bed in double ten, and then all the way back again for the horizontal double five if it comes into play.

The most glaring difference between the two routes becomes apparent when considering the problem of double five.

As the only odd double that can be typically be accessed from either of the two doubles, double five presents the player with the possibility of wasting a dart at double if he misses to the inside, and thus encourages him to aim higher than he normally would to avoid it.

Missing double ten to the inside, and forcing a switch to the dreaded double five, presents similar anxieties to the double 20 aficionado.

Accordingly, double five has one of the lowest overall doubles percentages of any double on the board, and finishing a score of ten in three darts (58.2%) is statistically less probable than finishing 60 (59.7%).

The corresponding double in the 16 sequence, double four, has none of these problems and is in fact hit with greater accuracy than doubles 20, ten or five.

This is not to say that double 20 is never the best option.

For many players who prefer it unequivocally, especially Gary Anderson, throwing for double 16 instead of double 20 would disrupt the natural flow and facility of their games.

And, of course, a clinical command of double 20 is indispensable for checkouts of 53 and above - that is to say tops cannot ever be eliminated from a player's game, no matter how much he may dislike it.

But however small the comparative advantages of double 16 may be, they are real and in the long run they may result in winning the few extra legs that could make the difference in a players' career.

ssjsa wrote:Christopher Kempf, the new statistical analyst of the PDC, takes a statistical look at the differences between double 16 and double 20.

A CHANGING of the guard took place at the William Hill World Darts Championship, not only with respect to the retirement of the veteran champion Phil Taylor or to Rob Cross' long-awaited defeat of world number one Michael van Gerwen, but also to the shifting strategies of players choosing a finishing double.

The 2017/2018 World Championship was the first in at least a decade in which each of the four semi-finalists preferred, won more legs on, and threw more darts at, double 16 than they did with respect to double 20.

It was also notable for the early eliminations of many of the traditional adherents of tops over double 16: none of James Wade, Adrian Lewis, Dave Chisnall, Peter Wright, Alan Norris or Jelle Klaasen - all of whom threw far more darts at tops in 2017 than they did at the other go-to double - advanced beyond the second round.

Van Gerwen, Jamie Lewis, Rob Cross and Phil Taylor by themselves hit 43% of the tournament's double 16s, with an accuracy approaching 50%, and only 16% of the tournament's double tops.

Throughout the World Championship, double 16 proved to be, on balance, the easier and more advantageous double of the two at which to throw for the leg.

The green bed had the higher doubles percentage (45.9%) than the red (41.1%).

Each of the doubles reached by missing double 16 to the inside (double eight and double four), moreover, had higher checkout percentages than those in the double 20 sequence (double ten and double five) - compare the wide gap between double four (44.4%) and double five (36.7%).

Players also missed double top to the inside 28.1% of the time, forcing themselves to switch to smaller doubles more frequently than double 16 throwers, who split their scores only 21.1% of the time.

These findings confirm data gathered in 2017 for the PDC as a whole, which indicate that the 32 checkout is a safer bet than 40, that doubles ten and five are more risky than doubles eight and four, and that the fear of missing to the inside, especially on the double 20 route, can substantially affect the likelihood of winning the leg.

The difference in outcomes between tops and double 16 becomes most striking when comparing checkout attempts between 41 and 52, in which a player can freely choose to leave one double or the other.

Of the 159 instances at Ally Pally in which a single number was successfully hit to set up two darts at a double at either D20 or D16, players in 80% of cases chose to set up the lesser of the two and checked out in 73% of attempts, while those who opted for "top of the shop" won the leg in that visit only 60% of the time.

If those probabilities remained constant in the long run across the PDC, favourers of double 16 could expect to win at least one more leg than their rivals in every match in which such the 41-52 checkout scenario presented itself half a dozen times.

It is not immediately clear why double 16 should have a higher checkout percentage than the equally-sized double 20.

To be sure, the astronomical 46% accuracy attained on double 16 at the World Championship was affected by the top players' propensity to throw for that double, which inflated the tournament percentage.

Phil Taylor, in particular, demonstrated for the final time his uncanny accuracy on double 16, which he missed to the inside only four times en route to 34 checkouts on his most frequently attempted double.

However, double 16 still has about a 2.5% advantage over tops in checkout percentage for the PDC as a whole. Why is this?

For one thing, double 20 is located at the highest point on the dartboard, above any of the trebles which a player might attempt en route to that double.

In contrast, double 16 is located roughly at the same height as the treble 19, which most players will attempt at least once during a leg.

The less extreme switch to double 16 from any other target may improve the overall odds of a checkout.

Furthermore, the layout of segments on the board may create a small inherent advantage for double 16's fans.

For players who miss double 16 to the inside, almost no adjustment is necessary. Double eight is immediately adjacent to double 16 and presents the player with a target that is very similarly shaped, along with double four, to the one at which he had just aimed.

In contrast, missing double 20 inside requires a dramatic switch to nearly the other end of the board for a vertically-oriented bed in double ten, and then all the way back again for the horizontal double five if it comes into play.

The most glaring difference between the two routes becomes apparent when considering the problem of double five.

As the only odd double that can be typically be accessed from either of the two doubles, double five presents the player with the possibility of wasting a dart at double if he misses to the inside, and thus encourages him to aim higher than he normally would to avoid it.

Missing double ten to the inside, and forcing a switch to the dreaded double five, presents similar anxieties to the double 20 aficionado.

Accordingly, double five has one of the lowest overall doubles percentages of any double on the board, and finishing a score of ten in three darts (58.2%) is statistically less probable than finishing 60 (59.7%).

The corresponding double in the 16 sequence, double four, has none of these problems and is in fact hit with greater accuracy than doubles 20, ten or five.

This is not to say that double 20 is never the best option.

For many players who prefer it unequivocally, especially Gary Anderson, throwing for double 16 instead of double 20 would disrupt the natural flow and facility of their games.

And, of course, a clinical command of double 20 is indispensable for checkouts of 53 and above - that is to say tops cannot ever be eliminated from a player's game, no matter how much he may dislike it.

But however small the comparative advantages of double 16 may be, they are real and in the long run they may result in winning the few extra legs that could make the difference in a players' career.

The bull is the third most hit double in the pdc behind 20's and 16's

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

"it's the same trolls spouting the same crap every other post.... you have to be some kind of sad act to watch nearly 8 hours of darts a day for 9 days just to post about how crap it is"